Bringing Hirschman Back In: “Exit”, “Voice”, and “Loyalty” in the Politics of Transnational Migration
Bringing Hirschman Back In: “Exit”, “Voice”, and “Loyalty” in the Politics of Transnational Migration
复制标题
让赫希曼回归：跨国移民政治中的“退出”、“声音”和“忠诚”
DOI：
10.1111/j.1557-203x.2010.01067.x
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Bert Hoffmann
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bert Hoffmann
翻译后摘要：阿尔伯特O.赫希曼的退出，声音和忠诚的模型，长期以来在国际移民研究的经典，已受到挑战的移民跨国主义的崛起，暴露了其假设的方法论民族主义。从拉丁美洲的情况下，本文认为，需要一个关键的修订赫希曼的计划，但它也使得这样的重新评估后，它确实可以提供有用的概念工具，了解今天的跨国移民及其政治影响的理论考虑与经验证据相结合。在经典的方案中，退出、发言权和忠诚的选择被认为是相互排斥的，而现在则相反：跨国移民的政治是由赫施曼的三个类别的重叠性和一致性精确定义的。赫希曼的“退出、声音和忠诚”模型长期以来一直是国际移民研究的经典，但由于移民跨国主义范式的兴起而受到挑战，这种范式暴露了其假设背后的“方法论民族主义”。从拉丁美洲的情况下，本文认为，需要一个关键的修订赫希曼的计划，但它也使得这样的重新评估后，它确实可以提供有用的概念工具，了解今天的跨国移民及其政治影响的理论考虑与经验证据相结合。在经典的方案中，退出、发言权和忠诚的选择被认为是相互排斥的，而现在则相反：跨国移民的政治是由赫氏三个类别的重叠和重叠性精确定义的。
Abstract:Albert O. Hirschman’s model of exit, voice, and loyalty, long a classic in the study of international migration, has been challenged by the rise of migrant transnationalism which exposed the methodological nationalism underlying its assumptions. Combining theoretical considerations with empirical evidence from Latin American cases, this paper argues the need for a critical revision of Hirschman’s scheme but it also makes the case that after such a reappraisal it can indeed provide helpful conceptual tools for understanding today’s transnational migration and its political implications. Whereas in the classic scheme the options of exit, voice, and loyalty were considered to be mutually exclusive, now the opposite holds: the politics of transnational migration are defined precisely by the overlapping and simultaneity of the three Hirschmanian categories.Albert O. Hirschman’s model of “exit, voice, and loyalty”, long a classic in the study of international migration, has been challenged by the rise of the migrant transnationalism paradigm which exposed the “methodological nationalism” underlying its assumptions. Combining theoretical considerations with empirical evidence from Latin American cases, this paper argues the need for a critical revision of Hirschman’s scheme but it also makes the case that after such a reappraisal it can indeed provide helpful conceptual tools for understanding today’s transnational migration and its political implications. Whereas in the classic scheme the options of exit, voice, and loyalty were considered to be mutually exclusive, now the opposite holds: the politics of transnational migration are defined precisely by the overlapping and simultaneity of the three Hirschmanian categories.